had commenced, and, occupying Ramah, tore down the constructions of his adversary, and “employed the stores of stone and timber which thus fell into his hands in fortifying the two adjacent cities of Geba and Mizpah against a repetition of the inroads of the king of the Ten Tribes. He further took the opportunity to provide Mizpah with a plentiful supply of water in case of a siege; and it was at this time that the great well was constructed in it, which gained such a melancholy celebrity in the days of Jeremiah " (Jer. xii. 7-9).

On his return from this triumphant progress, which probably seemed to him almost as glorious as the Ethiopic war, Asa was confronted by a second prophet, one "Jehu, the son of Hanani," who rebuked him for his want of faith in calling Benhadad to his aid, instead of simply trusting in the Lord, and told him that "he had done foolishly" (2 Chron. xvi. 9). It is not surprising that the king was enraged at the prophet's boldness. Rebuke is always an offence to the great ones of the earth, and especially when it is thought to be unprovoked and undeserved. Asa, no doubt, was pluming himself on his own wisdom and discretion. He had gained his end without it costing him a single drop of Jewish blood. At a small expenditure of gold and silver he had got his adversary chastised by a neighbouring monarch, and had then recovered his territory without needing to strike a blow. What a triumph of kingcraft and statesmanlike sagacity over the clumsiness of brute force! What a gain to have not only foiled, but despoiled, his adversary, to have turned the very stones and timber of the intended Israelite advanced post into additional strength for Jewish defences! But from the prophetical standpoint the whole aspect of the affair was different. Asa, Jehu considered, had shown distrust of God. He had put himself under obligations to a heathen king. He had given the sanction of his example to the practice of calling in foreigners to decide the internal quarrels of God's people. He had thus acted both wickedly and foolishly. But the king did not see things in this light. He thought the prophet had been guilty of great presumption in condemning a policy which had been justified by its success. He was angry because the rebuke was delivered openly, and because it caused a certain amount of dissatisfaction with his conduct among the people (2 Chron. xvii. 10). He therefore had Jehu arrested and thrown Ewald, "History of Israel," vol. iv. p. 35, Eng. tr.

into prison. From the time of the establishment of the monarchy there had frequently been a certain degree of friction and struggle between the royal and the prophetical authority,' but never as yet had a king ventured on visiting a prophet with punishment. It is a considerable blot on Asa's character, that he set the example of a persecution which ultimately proceeded to the extremest lengths, and which, more than anything else, brought down the vengeance of God upon His chosen people.3 It was, no doubt, in connection with the prophet's rebuke, and the dissatisfaction which it occasioned, that Asa, about this same time "oppressed some of the people” (2 Chron. xvii. 10). How far his severities extended we are not told; but it cannot be denied, that towards the close of his reign this generally pious prince tarnished, to some extent, the excellent character he had previously acquired, by acts indicative of a weakening of faith, and a failure of self-control. "To his own master each man must stand or fall" (Rom. xiv. 4); and God doubtless balanced Asa's long years of piety and faithfulness against his weaknesses and shortcomings towards the close of his life. His countrymen showed towards him a fair and equitable spirit. The general character which he left behind him among his contemporaries was that of a brave, warlike, and pious prince, one who "did right in the eyes of the Lord, as did David his father" (1 Kings xv. 11), and whose "heart was perfect all his days" (2 Chron. xv. 17). His faults and "follies" were condoned in consideration of his earnest desire to do God's will, and his persistence in the championship of true religion. It was thought a high eulogy on Jehoshaphat, his son, to say that "he walked in all the way of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the sight of the Lord" (1 Kings xxii. 43), and it was deemed right to bury the good king with great solemnity, and with every circumstance of honour, in the tomb which he had prepared for himself in the city of David (2 Chron. xvi. 14), adjacent to the sepulchres of his fathers (1 Kings xv. 24).

Compare 1 Sam. xv. 14-29; 2 Sam. xii. 1-14, xxiv. 11-17; 1 Kings xi. 29-39, xii. 21-24.

2 Saul's vengeance on Ahimelech, and his companions fell upon the priestly, not the prophetical, order (see 1 Sam. xxii. 11-19).

3 See 2 Kings xxi. 16, xxiv. 4; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16; Jer. li. 30, xxvi. 15, 23; &c.

Asa was for some time before his death "diseased in his feet." The author of Chronicles makes it a reproach to him, that in his sickness "he sought not to the Lord, but to the physicians (2 Chron. xvi. 12). We may conclude from this, that he placed an undue reliance on the aid to be obtained from man, and did not address his prayers for recovery with sufficient fervour to the heavenly throne; but moderns will scarcely blame him greatly for his recourse to ordinary human means of cure in preference to means involving something like the expectation of a miracle.

Asa "died in the one and fortieth year of his reign” (2 Chron. xvi. 13), at about the age of sixty.

CHAPTER V.

NADAB.

Want of materials for a biographical sketch of Nadab-He is murdered by Baasha after a reign of a few months.

Or Nadab, the son and successor of Jeroboam, nothing is recorded except that he ascended the throne of Israel in the second year of Asa king of Judah (1 Kings xv. 25), and was murdered in the year following (ibid. ver. 20) ́ by Baasha the son of Ahijah, of the tribe of Issachar, at Gibbethon, a Philistine town which the Israelites were besieging. No particulars are given of his age or actions. It is merely said, in the most general way, that "he did evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of his father, and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin" (ibid. ver. 26). Thus there are no materials for a biographical sketch of this monarch, whose reign probably did not cover the space of more than a few months.'

66

In 1 Kings xv. 25 a reign of "two years" is assigned to him; but the writer counts any part of a year as a year"; and all that we can distinctly gather from him is, that Nadab began to reign in some part of Asa's second year, and was murdered in some part of his third.

CHAPTER VI.

BAASHA.

Baasha's humble origin-His courage and daring-He murders Nadab, and is accepted as king-He exterminates the house of Jeroboam, yet continues Jeroboam's religious system-His military policy, aggressive -Alliance with Benhadad and attack on Judæa-Seizure and fortification of Ramah-Asa successfully counterplots him-He is denounced by a prophet-His death.

BAASHA, the third Israelite monarch, had a reign of twentyfour years (1 Kings xv. 33). He was the son of a certain Ahijah, of whom nothing more is known, and belonged to the very undistinguished and unimportant tribe of Issachar-the "ass crouching down between two burdens" of Jacob's prophecy (Gen. xlix. 14). It would seem that he was originally of very humble rank (1 Kings xvi. 2); and, at the siege of Gibbethon, where he conceived the design of murdering his master, Nadab, and seating himself upon his throne, he was perhaps no more than a common soldier. But he was a man of distinguished bravery," ambitious to excess, and of extraordinary audacity. Without, so far as appears, any prophetic encouragement, without claim of any kind to the kingly office, he ventured to organize a conspiracy against the reigning sovereign, the son of a valiant sire, who must have had the support of many powerful interests. What circumstances favoured his attempt we do not know. It is a mere conjecture of Ewald's that Nadab's war with the Philistines was proving unsuccessful, and that therefore dissatisfaction had arisen among the soldiers engaged in besieging Gibbethon, who were thus ripe for revolt, and ready to accept for sovereign any one whom they regarded